Summary
A man convicted of robbery did not get a fair trial when the state was allowed to argue specific punishment in its rebuttal but did not argue sentencing in the opening portion of the its closing argument.
Here the state said absolutely nothing about its position on the defendant's punishment during the opening portion of closing argument, wrote Judge Ronald R. Holliger in the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District opinion. The defendant had no way of knowing what the State's position would be in rebuttal and, therefore, had no way to respond to that position in its own closing argument.See the full content of this document
Extract
Punishment in Rebuttal Sends Case Back to Court
In State of Missouri, Respondent v. Mark R. Davis, Appellant, a man convicted of three counts of first degree robbery and three counts of armed criminal action relating to three separate ro...
See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
